Obama Wins Debate

The laughing liberal wrote:

<quoted text>
Please educate yourself on how a bill does or doesn't become a law since it's clear you DO NOT UNDERSTAND the rules and tactics used by the minority to kill a bill:
http://www.votesmart.org/resource_govt101_02....
After you read it, hopefully you're able to comprehend that the Senate DID NOT have 60 of one party (so called super majority) and needed some Democrats to agree with the proposed legislation of they could block it.
Here's the make up of the Senate in 2003:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/108th_United_Sta...
There were 51 repubs, 48 dems, and 1 Ind = 100. As you see, there is NO SUPER MAJORITY in the 108th Congress (2003-05).

Why is it a Democratic do-nothing Congress these last two years takes all the blame for everything but not the Republic do-nothing Congress before that?

The thing I like to note is Bush got everything he wanted those first five years and here in the last two has repeatedly waved the veto pen. That changed everything.

WASHINGTON (CNN)-- After Friday night's presidential debate, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger defended Sen. John McCain's attack against Sen. Barack Obama for Obama's willingness to meet with the Iranian president "without precondition."

Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger says he is not in favor of negotiations with Iran at the presidential level.

Immediately after the debate, the McCain campaign released a statement from Kissinger backing the Republican nominee's sentiments on structuring any talks with Iran.

"Sen. McCain is right. I would not recommend the next president of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the presidential level," Kissinger said in the statement.

"My views on this issue are entirely compatible with the views of my friend Sen. John McCain. We do not agree on everything, but we do agree that any negotiations with Iran must be geared to reality."

McCain and Obama sparred during the debate over how to best handle relations with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has repeatedly threatened Israel.

Both candidates referenced Kissinger's comments from a CNN forum last week in which former secretaries of state discussed several topics, including Iran, and the presidential candidates disagreed over what Kissinger had said.

The exchange started with McCain criticizing Obama for stating in two previous debates that he would sit down with Ahmadinejad, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Cuban President Raúl Castro "without precondition."

McCain, the Republican nominee, said that in the past, U.S. presidents such as Ronald Reagan refused to meet with adversaries until a Cabinet member, such as the secretary of state, had several talks.

"Look, I'll sit down with anybody, but there's got to be preconditions," McCain said. Watch the candidates debate policy in Iran »

Obama responded by claiming that Kissinger, "along with five recent secretaries of state, just said we should meet with Iran, guess what, without preconditions."

McCain denied the claim: "Dr. Kissinger did not say that he would approve a face-to-face meeting" with Ahmadinejad. "He did say there could be secretary and lower-level meetings."

Obama defended his stance, explaining, "Look, Sen. McCain keeps on using this example that suddenly the president would just meet with somebody without doing any preparation, without having low-level talks. Nobody's been talking about that. Sen. McCain knows it. That's a mischaracterization of my position."

He also said, "I reserve the right as president of the United States to meet with anyone at the time and place of my choosing if I think it's going to keep the American people safe."

MORE "SMOKE & MIRRORS CAMPAIGNING

Get so truth people Prisionplanet.com ,Obama isn´t going to save the day or McCain bought and paid by globalist bankers....

NO QUESTION Senator Obama won the debates.Senator McCain talks like he has marbles in his mouth;he probable has them in his head too?

jference wrote:

<quoted text>
Interesting that we watched the same debate and conclude something entirely different. To me McCain looked and acted old. His eyes kept blinking, he was snarky. He did not look at his opponent. He lost his temper. He seemed stressed. He just didn't presidential at all to me.

I would add that he rambled in circles in the beginning, talked too much insider politics part of the time, spoke way too much of the past and almost nothing of the solutions to real American problems. It's as if he wants Americans to elect him based on where he's been ("I've been there") when they're looking to elect someone based on what he is proposing to do.

His refusal to be engaged with either Lehrer or Obama seriously hurt him too and I've been amused at the ridiculous spin his supporters have cranked out trying to paint that obvious blunder as not one.

Stupid Liberals wrote:

Debate Wrap Up:‘Jim, I’ve got a bracelet too’ Posted by Dirty Harry on Friday, September 26th, 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch... UPDATED: Check out the video. Obama can’t remember the name of the Sgt. without looking at it. Imagine if Palin did that! By any standard McCain pretty well trounced Obama who was constantly on defense, forced to explain himself and thrown off his game. You’re losing when you explain yourself and that took up a lot of Obama’s time. The current post-debate spin is that we have a tie.

Right you are I almost forgot about that. " I've got a bracelet too." Ha Ha that's funny I don't remember him showing off his new bracelet at the convention. Then he couldn't even remember the name. What a phony. But the media brainwashed lemming liberals continue to worship him no matter what evidence is presented and then respond with the chorus "lies,lies" over and over till they believe their own rant. Sad really. Freedom is the cost of equality

Jim wrote:

Obama looked like a dark, mean angry negro (Willie Horton or OJ Simpson) who wanted to kill a white man on stage.
Scary.
I never did like socialist with Muslim names who hung out with terrorists.

You don't get out much do ya?
I'm guessing your on someones watch list?
LowLIFE!

Obama bin Biden wrote:

<quoted text>Right you are I almost forgot about that. " I've got a bracelet too." Ha Ha that's funny I don't remember him showing off his new bracelet at the convention. Then he couldn't even remember the name. What a phony. But the media brainwashed lemming liberals continue to worship him no matter what evidence is presented and then respond with the chorus "lies,lies" over and over till they believe their own rant. Sad really. Freedom is the cost of equality

This is the type of fool McCain plays to. Emotional BS which exploits dead soldiers. His "I've got a bracelet from a dead soldier" as if that justifies his bad judgment in supporting the war and diverting attention from where the terrorists WERE to attack a country where they WEREN'T, cost the lives of thousands of soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.

McCain has poor judgment, has always had poor judgment and at 72 isn't likely to change.

Plain Jane wrote:

<quoted text>
This is the type of fool McCain plays to. Emotional BS which exploits dead soldiers. His "I've got a bracelet from a dead soldier" as if that justifies his bad judgment in supporting the war and diverting attention from where the terrorists WERE to attack a country where they WEREN'T, cost the lives of thousands of soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.
McCain has poor judgment, has always had poor judgment and at 72 isn't likely to change.

One wonders, if McCain hadn't helped Bush lie us into an unjust war, would the person named on his bracelet still be alive?

Plain Jane wrote:

<quoted text>
I sure hope so. Most Americans are fed up with libelers getting away with spewing the most vile lies and never having any accountability for it. Libel (lies about people) are not protected speech under the constitution.

Idiot. Of course lies about people are legal. If it was illegal to tell a lie about a person, most Americans would be in jail. For example, you and the other far-right kooks who spew the "Obama is a muslim" lie would have been arrested a long time ago.

Plain Jane wrote:

<quoted text>
This is the type of fool McCain plays to. Emotional BS which exploits dead soldiers. His "I've got a bracelet from a dead soldier" as if that justifies his bad judgment in supporting the war and diverting attention from where the terrorists WERE to attack a country where they WEREN'T, cost the lives of thousands of soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.
McCain has poor judgment, has always had poor judgment and at 72 isn't likely to change.

I felt the chill of Patton's arrogance in McCain's demand that those soldiers not "die in vain". But has anyone asked McCain what "victory in Iraq" is supposed to look like this week?

Patton fascinated me since my father was a very similar personality. In some respects you had to admire him but he made a terrible father type, I can assure you. Patton was eventually painfully sidelined for his god-awful grasp of reality, especially politics, despite being a brilliant warrior. So was my father, oddly enough.

McCain sometimes shows flashes of the worst of Patton in his thinking. Framing the end of our occupation as a defeat or suggesting it dishonors those who died is as grotesquely wrong as Patton often was about the political side of war. It's worth watching that superb George C. Scott movie again and filter it through your impression of McCain.

Chicago Illinois Crisis wrote:

Perhaps the U.S. should pull out of Chicago?
Body count: In the last six months 292 killed (murdered) in Chicago; 221 killed in Iraq.
Sens. Barack Obama & Dick Durbin,
Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr.,
Gov. Rod Blogojevich,
House leader Mike Madigan,
Atty. Gen. Lisa Madigan (daughter of Mike),
Mayor Richard M. Daley (son of Mayor Richard J. Daley)
.....our leadership in Illinois.....all Democrats.
Thank you for the combat zone in Chicago.
Of course, they're all blaming each other.
Can't blame Republicans; there aren't any!
State pension fund $44 Billion in debt, worst in country.
Cook County (Chicago) sales tax 10.25% highest in country.(Look 'em up if you want).
Chicago school system rated one of the worst in the country.
This is the political culture that Obama comes from in Illinois. And he's gonna 'fix'Washington politics for us!

Al Good Points!

Heal thouself 1st.

To your first point. In January 2000 after Bush took office, Jim Jeffords switched his party affiliation to Independant. This effectively handed control of the Senate to the democrats. Recall all the 'powersharing' talk of the time. The dems refused and selected their charimen. The Republican Party has only had a 2-tiebreak (VP) margin in the Senate from the mid terms in 2002-2006. A two seat or VP tie break is not a filibuster/veto proof margin (60 votes).

As to point 2. IMO, Bush got everything he caved in to. Because the Republican party didn't have a filibuster/veto-proof margin in the Senate, they dealt with filibuster after filibuster and eventually had to cave to the dems in order to get any work done.

Aging Hippy wrote:

<quoted text>Why is it a Democratic do-nothing Congress these last two years takes all the blame for everything but not the Republic do-nothing Congress before that?
The thing I like to note is Bush got everything he wanted those first five years and here in the last two has repeatedly waved the veto pen. That changed everything.

If the law allowed tobacco companies to advertise freely here's what they'd say:

"Smoking increases your strength, your vitality, your endurance. It makes you more attractive, rounds out those curves, grows hair on bald heads, decreases infant mortality, and has been proven to prevent cancer."

And as educated as we are for all the studies that prove smoking to be toxic, if they played that as a commercial a few thousand times, cigarette sales would go through the roof. Why? Not because we want the truth, we don't. We want to be told our appetites are okay.

Those who desperately want to hear no more mention of that scary Mr. Obama will chant and dance to McCain/Palin songs until they drop in the face of any logic. But McCain/Palin is not a real place, it's a theme park in our memories.

Nevertheless, the emerging mandate FOR Obama seems, more and more, to be based on the man's true value and national recognition of the fact that we are literally dying for inspired leadership.

There's plenty to be said for McCain, just that you can't buy back time. You can't go home again to that comfy place in the suburbs of your memory when there was a place for everything and everything had a place.

It's time for America to step up to the plate, not for us to order reruns. Palin is enough of a bad joke, but watching McCain banging against the bars of his cage and promising us a return to the sixties or seventies or whenever it is we yearn for is just plain sad.

What he's promising is a place you can't go to, it's approval for a toxic substance that really will kill us just as it is doing now.

Horse Country wrote:

<quoted text>
If you live in DC don't you want change you cam believe in
Take a look at your mayor in past years Marion Barry. Drugs user Corruption and . Fenty not much better. Fraud misappropation's of funds. Child Propewctive Services not doing their job which result in the murder of children murdered in DC, and the list goes on and on
Crime murder drugs teens being killed every night. Gang increase.Illegals
DON"T VOTE BECAUSE OF COLOR BEEN PROVEN IT DON"T WORK.
Just take a look at DC and Baltimore. Is it better now Hell NO
Obama is not for Americans or blacks He is deceptive sending America to slaughter.
NO OBAMA NO PLAN NO EXPERIENCE NOT GOOD FOR AMERICA
Lets turn the inter cities around and make them safe again

There are people in this country who love to live in squalor and live like Dogs , but they want to be treated like Kings and Queens ! Go figure !

Eron wrote:

To your first point. In January 2000 after Bush took office, Jim Jeffords switched his party affiliation to Independant. This effectively handed control of the Senate to the democrats. Recall all the 'powersharing' talk of the time. The dems refused and selected their charimen. The Republican Party has only had a 2-tiebreak (VP) margin in the Senate from the mid terms in 2002-2006. A two seat or VP tie break is not a filibuster/veto proof margin (60 votes).
As to point 2. IMO, Bush got everything he caved in to. Because the Republican party didn't have a filibuster/veto-proof margin in the Senate, they dealt with filibuster after filibuster and eventually had to cave to the dems in order to get any work done.
<quoted text>

Do you ever nitpik! The Congress was as nearly evenly divides as a Republican Congress as it was a Democratic Congress. Slim majorities don't count EITHER direction except for the fact that the president and tie breaking Vice President during this entire time are Republicans.

Even Wikipedia recognizes this:
"But the Republicans won control the chamber with the tie-breaking vote of the new Vice President Richard B. Cheney on January 20th. The small Republican Majority would last until May 24, 2001 when Republican Senator Jim Jeffords of Vermont left the Republican Party and became an Independent who chose to caucus with the Democrats. The Republicans won back the Senate in the 2002 Midterm elections."

Bottomline: What did we learn from all this? A slim majority is utterly meaningless if you are opposite the party of the President and only marginally meaningful when you are the party of the President.

And bipartisan takes two to tango, period.

Try addressing that.

Disrespect for Fallen Soldier!

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-hust...

NoamChimpsky wrote:

<quoted text>
Idiot. Of course lies about people are legal. If it was illegal to tell a lie about a person, most Americans would be in jail. For example, you and the other far-right kooks who spew the "Obama is a muslim" lie would have been arrested a long time ago.

You are an ignorant fool. Libel and slander are not protected speech. The fact that people don't always sue when they are libeled doesn't make it legal. Libel isn't a difference of opinion. It is telling deliberate lies about someone that damages their reputation and people do bring lawsuits and they do win them.

Aging Hippy wrote:

<quoted text>Why is it a Democratic do-nothing Congress these last two years takes all the blame for everything but not the Republic do-nothing Congress before that?
The thing I like to note is Bush got everything he wanted those first five years and here in the last two has repeatedly waved the veto pen. That changed everything.

As I remember the republican do-nothing congress got canned for being a do-nothing congress, maybe we should start over with independents.